2nd Caucasian Kindjal for comment

[David]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

As I said in the previous post, each to their own. You'll be telling me next that glass plates are a thing of the past.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by David

Congratuations Gav. I am glad that you finally got the "expert" assessment that you have been wanting on this piece. Funny thing about "experts"....if we look long enough we will always be able to find one that will tell us what we want to hear. I am not trying to say that you latest "expert" is not absolutely correct. He may well be. Personally i know nothing about these knives and to me it looks quite nice. But as someone who has spent a lot of time collecting and learning about keris i have discovered that things are not always what they appear to be and sometimes people deliberately create things to deceive. Not necessarily the case here, but always a possibility.
Many of the people on this forum who have taken the time to try to answer your questions about this piece have a great deal of combined knowledge about these knives. Some have made it their specialty. Doesn't mean they are right about your kindjal either, but they didn't have to respond to your post, they have done so with good will in the spirit of collecting and sharing knowledge. You might do youself well not to alienate an entire community of knowledgeable collectors just because you found an expert who told you what you wanted to hear.

Hi David,

Thank you for your posting, I whole heartedly agree about things never appearing what they seems to be and that a lot of items are being created to fool the unwarey, we all at one time or another have been bitten by these deceivers, I too have knowingly passed on goods of very questionable backgrounds that I known not to be the real deal to experts who had to have the item, heck I know, I made the damn thing and they even went to to the trouble of telling me the whole history of the type of item in question but, this is not a reflection of who I am or what I do. How does one talk an expert out of what he wants so dearly.
I know I have been collecting since a boy and weapons for the last 12 years or so. Although I don't have millions to spend on such toys that I desire but like so many here I know a good deal more than most and I too have handled vast amounts of all styles of edged weapons in some very fine collections and at every arms far for much longer than the 12 years, not that this should be taken in an arogant manner either, these weapons are a passion of mine, not something that I want a pat on the back for as mentioned elsewhere.
It is disturbing for me that those who are considered both by myself, others here and themselves as experts, should be able to offer up a little more than links to others webpages and shrug off this piece as a fake, although there have been others with very good points and posting made with reasons stated, which is most important to everyone concerned viewing these threads as it is the only way for everyone, including themselves to learn further.
The straight out calling this piece a fake or poor quality is of little concern to me, if it is, it is, that is fine and cannot be changed....but what you say about possibly alienating myself from these people because I heard what I wanted to hear from another, should not put others offside, as humans we all continue to learn and if we think we know it all the learning has stopped. I have offered up images from myself and opinions of others who are very successful in their fields and it is their livelyhood too. By placing these things back on the table so to speak in this forum I would hope others here will continue to offer up images and real facts and reference points to enhance the learning process by all and debunk what more I have offered up...
Thanks again for your interest in this thread.

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

"The well known antique jeweller and watch maker"

Tell me Gav did you ask this expert how many kindjal has he handled in his career? I have an old gentleman down the street from where I work who is also an expert jeweler and watch maker since 1940 but I don't think he knows much about kindjals? I would not ask a dentist to give me his opinion on my cardiogram I would seek out a cardiologist.

Lew

Hi Lew, it was not the Kindjal that I took it there for, it was from the advise of Alex that I did so and I took it to a European born family of jewellers for further interest. These guys like your jeweller Lew, do certainly known about quality workmanship, age and styles through all mediums I would think, if not they have just lucked their way through life.

Originally Posted by fernando

When you don't have a dog, you hunt with a cat . On the other hand, a certain person may be able to grade a determined silver work, from simply stamped to thouroughly chased, whereas not necessarily knowing how to grade a kinzhal per se .
... Just my humble opinnion, Lew.
Fernando

Thanks for the proverb Fernando, so true, I should have looked below before replying but am doing so in order of postings, thanks.

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Fernando

I am sure there are modern silversmiths who do masterful work but you need to look at the object as a whole and not through a jewelers lupe.

Lew

Thanks Lew, it was as a whole it was studied, and studied closely.

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hello,
My initial reaction to the 'Kindjal' posts was not to get involved in something I was not familiar with nor to get involved in the subsequent "toing and froing". I do feel, although this may alienate me from some of the Forum, that the entire tone of this debate was set at the very beginning of the first post with a less than necessary remark with regard to the skill level of the Kindjal maker. It seems to me only polite and courteous to give your opinion in a gracious and friendly manner in the knowledge that the recipient has spent good money and may be in some occasions without the necessary knowledge to fully understand what they have purchased good or not so good, after all that is why they have posted in the first place, to accrue the knowledge to facilitate their collecting bug. I am always disappointed when short one sentence answers are given, usually negative, without the courtesy of a Dear so and so, Hi so and so etc., and are finished without a Regards so and so etc. Having said all this I am grateful for the knowledge base present in this Forum I just wish those with a greater degree of this knowledge would be a bit more tolerant of folks with more run of the mill aspirations with regard to their collections, after all most of us have fiscal constraints that preclude us from purchasing bits with the 'wow factor' although we may turn up with one occasionally with luck and a bit of that 'Knowledge'. This reply is aimed at no one in particular and everyone in general. Please remember most of us do this for pleasure and not for gain and our communication with each other should be pleasurable also, even if the opinion given is not what the recipient would prefer to hear but an honest answer given honestly but always with courtesy.
Regards,
Norman.

Extremely well spoken Norman with great courtesy. I can appreciate not everyone can or will communicate in the manner that many are acustomed, that is fine, I still have trouble though, listening to those who make debunking comments without offering up a "well see that there Gav, in year blah blah the standard for that was this and that feature there was not found until date so and so and so on and so forth, links provided are not as clear in many cases as the images I have provided and at no where near the light or magnification so i think some elements of those presented have been lost but I am not a photographer, but I do take photographs so I can comment at some level.
I still ask to see comparrisions in collections of those who have passed comment either good or bad to point and out the where fors and why fors as to why this piece in question is what some think it is from the images, but I think the alienation excuse may be quietly reserved for not doing so.

Originally Posted by TVV

For myself, I have always thought that every time I post an item for discussion in this forum and ask for opinion from the other members here, I have to be willing to accept or at least consider their comments, even if said comments may not be what I have hoped to read for the item in question. If I am unwilling to consider any opinion different from my own, why even bother posting here and asking, unless I am merely looking for a pat on the back?
Regards,
Teodor

All comments are accepted and noted, the problem lays with no reply to the debunking images and questions that I have posted, it seems the learning stops dead because of that. Are we all expected to hear "that's no good" and that's the end of it? All comments are considered, processed and replied to with a wishing to know more about their reasons why rather than a I know so or I feel. Sure feeling has a lot to do with anything we do in this world but facts support or debunk facts and without facts there is no knowledge of anything.

Thank you everyone for your interest in this posting, unfortunately I am out of time for now and will address each and every other response tomorrow night. Please in the mean time if so inclined cover off a few of the other questions I have offered up like the UV light and the further images in relation to the comments made, it is the only was to learn and move foward. If after all possible knowldege has been exhausted and it turns out to be a late made piece i will as always be happy to acknowledge the fact, I do hope those who dismiss it with out fulling viewing all that is offered up would in turn acknowledge that they too have learnt something from the postings, if and when it is varified as authentic again further down the track.

very best regards

Gav

[David]

Originally Posted by freebooter

The straight out calling this piece a fake or poor quality is of little concern to me, if it is, it is, that is fine and cannot be changed....but what you say about possibly alienating myself from these people because I heard what I wanted to hear from another, should not put others offside, as humans we all continue to learn and if we think we know it all the learning has stopped.

Gavin, i think you have not quite grasped what i was trying to say. Probably my fault for not being clear enough. It is not the facts of these threads which i personally found alienating. Perhaps i read too much between your lines, the the post which prompted me to write what i did came off to me as "I found some some real experts, they told me all you guys are wrong and i was right....so there!" Followed, of course, by a very large raspberry.
Now, this may not have been you intention, but it is certainly the way it came off to me and i would guess probably some others. Norman (and yourself) make some good points about knowledgable members sometimes being too hard on certain items that get posted and of course if someone knocks a knife you own you want to hear solid facts as to why, especially if you thought it was something greater than what people are making it out to be. The difference i see here is that while some members have knocked your kindjal (an object), you seem to me knocking the the members (actual people). This is what i found to be possibly alienating, not the mere fact that you have found your own experts who disagree with the members here. Most of our membership is pretty good about admitting they were wrong when presented with facts that show they were.
BTW, you seem you want very specific evidence from the forum members as to why they believe your kindjals are not quite kosher. What evidence (other than their say so) did your experts give you that they are indeed authentic antiques?
Keep in mind Gavin that i've got no horse in this race. I know nothing about kindjals though i do like to think i know something about quality. I could clearly see the points of forumites who remarked negatively on your first kindjal. I am on the fence about the second. The silverwork and neillo look quite beautiful to my eye. I don't know enough about the blades to know whether or not the style is period. It's a nice knife regardless of it's age or origins.
What i suggest is that everyone just take a step back and take a deep breathe. I don't think any member here intended to disrespect you with their comments about your kindjals. Their comments were on the knife itself. I also think that they are trying their best to communicate with you just what it is about these knives that don't sit right with them and if you gave it some time more might come out. And they may well be wrong about this last one. I am just afraid that rubbing your expert's opinions in their faces, especially ones that are equally unsubstantiated, is not likely to get you positive responses.

[ALEX]

I also feel the Forum had been swayed to the direction of mixing personal feelings, guesses and comments from others with unsufficient experience in a particular field. Everyone had been professional and courteous, but I believe it'd be better to stick with the basics, i.e. sharing opinions based solely on specific experience and knowledge! At this point many experienced members voiced their solid opinions and reasoning behind them. The best advice was to handle as many pieces as possible, which is the only way to tell the difference. There is no science behind telling an authentic antique kindjal (or painting, sculpture or anything else) from repro. Experience is what counts. Congratulations to those who were able to learn.
It's time to move on.
OUT

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by ward

I am sorry Norman that my messages seem kurt. I answer a lot of emails and questions a day. I am not trying to be impolite it is just my nature. I would rather see a collector buy simpler honest old pieces than fancy reproduction or tourist pieces. I see no reason to suger coat a response and give false hope to someone. The piece stands on its own or does not.

Thats alright Ward,
When at work I operate with, short clear direct responses without the sit around and have a chat attitude as sometimes seconds are precious and when wasted the day can have a snowball effect. I will touch on the fancier "reproduction and tourist pieces" shortly. False hope, real hope and items standing on their own only do so with consistant facts across the board, I have filed through so many postings here on kindjals and find no consistancy with points of interest raised and the same when taking these notes on board when viewing with great details Kindjals in very reputable dealer's webpages. I will follow this up soon with further postings.

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Norman

Some of our fellow formites are advanced collectors in there respected areas such as in Eastern European,South East Asian,Indo Persian and African weapons so when I post something that I am not sure of I am looking for their honest unbiased opinion. So if I bought something that later turns out to be not what I originally hope for than I take it with a grain of salt and move on. I feel if several individuals with one hundred plus years of combined collecting expertise in a given area tell me something I should listen. Yes I agree sometimes they can be a bit blunt but there is a saying "If it looks like a duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck". I generally stay away from Chinese and Eastern European items due to the fact that they have become a cottage industry in some the mother countries and the replicas though traditionally made are becoming harder to differentiate from the old ones.

Regards,

Lew

Very good point Lew, the combined experience here is a great sum of knowledge, what I am trying to sift through here(is for the betterment of all to understand these items), is the consistancy of comments made with conviction by different individuals that contradict other individuals here, the relationship of what is said and how it doesn't colate to images offered up. I am not trying to discredit anyone, I am sure there must be very good reason for these differences, it is just not explained clearly if at all.
I just want to see and hear what these reasons for different standards are, not just have it accepted without an explanation.

The ducks quacking and I don't see no emus...

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Teodor,
I am in absolute agreement that the very act of posting an item is to invite constructive criticism and that if you do not want to hear or acknowledge that your item may or may not be what you had hoped then don't post. On the other hand comments and opinions can be proffered with tact and understanding and need not be in any way derisory or demeaning to get over a point.
Regards,
Norman.


Hi Ward,
Having mentioned no names you are obviously aware that your responses are short and to the point, I wouldn't say curt. First may I say that I am grateful that you have taken the time and effort to respond and give your opinion on some of my pieces, you are obviously knowledgeable and I do appreciate the imparting of said knowledge. I wouldn't expect you to give false hope and to be fair I never suggested anywhere that you or anyone else should tell anybody anything other than your honest opinion. I am probably behind the times with regard to the beginning and ending of replies, my daughter tells me I'm a dinosaur and that this is for letter writing and not the net, I am retired and have time for the niceties and so will stick with them. The most important thing is the common interest we all share the posters and repliers for without them there would be no Forum.
Regards,
Norman.

Nicely said Norman, are you sure you haven't spent time in the diplomatic corp? I too agree there are some very knowledgeable people here and I too wish to hear all that is said good or bad about anything posted, though delivery of anything is always important.

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

To fight your corner here, you really have to be sure or know your interest, and do the research. The mysterious "rightness" in one item is completely different in another. All collectors have struggled with this sort of work at one time or another.
The items in question are indeed better than many "right" stuff I have seen that I am sure are not apprentice work due to location and time frame. All adding to the difficulties, just that these do not appear to be truly old.
Auction houses some better than others, are only expert in selling!!!!!!!!! Most often thier knowledge is only based on the price an object made at the last same category of sales whether they knew anything about it or not. They are salespeople only, lets drink there mini bar .

Hi Tim, that sounds like me struggling to get a hold of the elusive standard for sure....I think I need a double of what ever you are pouring....make that a tripple on the rocks...

Originally Posted by David

Norman, i certainly agree that it is important that we all respond to one another in a civil and understanding manner. That said, having followed these 2 kindjal threads, i do not see anywhere that any member was uncivil with Gavin.
As for remarks made about the skill level of the creator of any piece, unless i made it myself, or my father, uncle or grandfather was the craftsman, i see no reason whatsoever to take offense. We should be able to separate ourselves from the things we collect and i should hope that criticism of my knife is not criticism of me.

You are quite right David, there has been no personal attack on me, only on what can be seen in the images, I take no offense persay, I am disappointed as expressed clearly in past posting of the lack of whys and wherefores, that is very disappointing coming from who people here consider experts and the jumping on the band wagon by others with the same experinece again with out so much as a small consistant comparison, I have read many of the Keris forum postings, mostly things are put into perspective clearly and concisely with good factual backup....I still have many question unanswered and will sum them all up shortly in an other reply.

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Lew,
Agreed, there is a vast resource of knowledge here and it is a pleasure and a privilege to be able to tap that resource at will. As to experts, along with their expertise comes a certain blase approach to lesser specimens of the genre, weapons I mean not people, this is to be understood, I am an an expert of sorts, a professional photographer for forty years, anything less than 5x4 is a miniature format camera to me. Usually when someone finds out my ex profession out come the holiday photographs or the tired old S.L.R. from the cupboard but I have to say I have never been unnecessarily blunt or short but neither have I given them false hope that "Yes you could be the next, insert name of famous photographer of your choice, honest you really could!" Everyone of you are correct in that honesty and candour should never be sacrificed but neither should sensitivity and understanding.
Regards,
Norman.
P.S. Yes, I think you have to be particularly sharp, pardon the pun, to enter the Chinese antique market.

Originally Posted by David

That's funny Norm, i've been a pro shooter for more than 30 years now and have always considered anything larger than 2 1/4 as those unnecessarily large format cameras.

You guys will have plenty to talk about when that minibar is opened, maybe you can click of a few too for the forum gathering postings.....

Originally Posted by ward

getting back to the original post. Either you see the differece between this piece in workmanship style and form and a 19th century piece or you do not. If you are happy with the piece fine otherwise move on. I personally feel the piece was made somewhere between 1950-1990.

Hi Ward, please come in and share with me your reasons why, the only to learn for myself and others. Thanks in advance.

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Tim,
I have seen many things described incorrectly at auction houses and agreed just because they say it is so does not make it necessarily so, see the disclaimer. As to the "rightness" factor I believe this can only be determined absolutely, if there is any doubt, by handling the object in question indeed the only times I have bought a pup, several in fact, was over the net with only photographs to guide me. Kindjals are not my area of interest or knowledge, although I would not pass up the opportunity to acquire a nice one given the chance, therefore I am not defending Gav's notions of the "rightness" of his acquisitions I was only concerned that some responses were a bit insensitive.
We are all different and perhaps what one person finds insensitive others do not, each to their own I guess is the only answer.
Regards,
Norman.

I too have, any many here have found these misrepresented items, sometimes refered to as sleepers. Handling an object along with knowledge is paramount I feel also Norman, as Scratch here has said about many things in my collection both weapons and non weapons, the images provided do not do them justice...mybe a few photgraphy tips can bring the real essence of this piece to light?

Originally Posted by ALEX

I also feel the Forum had been swayed to the direction of mixing personal feelings, guesses and comments from others with unsufficient experience in a particular field. Everyone had been professional and courteous, but I believe it'd be better to stick with the basics, i.e. sharing opinions based solely on specific experience and knowledge! At this point many experienced members voiced their solid opinions and reasoning behind them. The best advice was to handle as many pieces as possible, which is the only way to tell the difference. There is no science behind telling an authentic antique kindjal (or painting, sculpture or anything else) from repro. Experience is what counts. Congratulations to those who were able to learn.
It's time to move on.
OUT

A shame you are opting out of this Alex, you have provided the most substantiated comments in my eyes and good points of reference to follow up on. I will be offering up more questions(and further images of this and others) that have arisen from these specific and knowlegdable comments for further discussion shortly.

Thank you everyone who has taken an interest thus far and thank you for all comments good or bad, it is the only way forward.

regards

Gav

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by David

Gavin, i think you have not quite grasped what i was trying to say. Probably my fault for not being clear enough. It is not the facts of these threads which i personally found alienating. Perhaps i read too much between your lines, the the post which prompted me to write what i did came off to me as "I found some some real experts, they told me all you guys are wrong and i was right....so there!" Followed, of course, by a very large raspberry.
Now, this may not have been you intention, but it is certainly the way it came off to me and i would guess probably some others. Norman (and yourself) make some good points about knowledgable members sometimes being too hard on certain items that get posted and of course if someone knocks a knife you own you want to hear solid facts as to why, especially if you thought it was something greater than what people are making it out to be. The difference i see here is that while some members have knocked your kindjal (an object), you seem to me knocking the the members (actual people). This is what i found to be possibly alienating, not the mere fact that you have found your own experts who disagree with the members here. Most of our membership is pretty good about admitting they were wrong when presented with facts that show they were.
BTW, you seem you want very specific evidence from the forum members as to why they believe your kindjals are not quite kosher. What evidence (other than their say so) did your experts give you that they are indeed authentic antiques?
Keep in mind Gavin that i've got no horse in this race. I know nothing about kindjals though i do like to think i know something about quality. I could clearly see the points of forumites who remarked negatively on your first kindjal. I am on the fence about the second. The silverwork and neillo look quite beautiful to my eye. I don't know enough about the blades to know whether or not the style is period. It's a nice knife regardless of it's age or origins.
What i suggest is that everyone just take a step back and take a deep breathe. I don't think any member here intended to disrespect you with their comments about your kindjals. Their comments were on the knife itself. I also think that they are trying their best to communicate with you just what it is about these knives that don't sit right with them and if you gave it some time more might come out. And they may well be wrong about this last one. I am just afraid that rubbing your expert's opinions in their faces, especially ones that are equally unsubstantiated, is not likely to get you positive responses.

Hi David, thanks again for coming in.

Maybe a little was lost in both our translations. No one at this stage has said anyone is wrong, I am however tenacious in understanding the differing points of comparisons and comments and consistancy of statements and will vigorously follow these up when time does permit as I plainly cannot understand these somewhat obvious points, more to follow in up coming postings with these and other unanswered questions, maybe my questions are beyond the realm of probable questioning without the item in their hands???
With regards to what other dealers and collectors/enthusiasts have said about this piece, I will add too that this piece was shown around a few more dealers on Saturday at the Brisbane arms and Militaria fair with good reception but no further concrete evidence other than what is below. About half a dozen people including the Jeweller and previous enthusiast have passed comment with some interesting points, I also rang the previous owner today an asked if he had any more information in his weapons register.
Some of the points that have been mentioned are First and formost the superb quality workmanship has been mentioned and that it is distinctly Georgian and is a very lovely piece without a doubt made by a master craftsman for someone of wealth or importance, it too was offered up that the rubbed inscription panel will most likely hold the key to understanding it's history and who it was for. It was also mentioned that the blade has a good deal of age to it and does show despite what some fool at some stage has done with it and that is run the blade over a belt sander at some stage of it's life, "they should have been drawn and quartered" was the remark of one dealer about what it has suffered. I have had good points bought to my attention on the best way to fix it and out of the cupboard comes my ole faithful Lanskey honing stones or varying degrees and the long task of oiling and rubbing with the stones starts. It has also been advised that the acorn final and the acorn patterns that I hadn't previously noticed in the neillo design and in the chiseling may also real more about the time period if research can be done on these points. Also said that it carries a good deal of honest wear to the reverse side and has beeen well cared for and other than the state of the blade, well respected.
It too has been stated in relation to other Kindjals that have been through the hands of these dealers, that an unsightly seam is often seen in the manufacture of the scabbard, someone has gone to great trouble to join this scabbard in an very unobvious spot and short of pulling the old timber from the scabbard it remains undetectable to the naked eye. When probed about hallmarks it was said that it is not uncommon at all to find Silver unhallmarked. The design of the rivet heads was noted too as it gives a very positive feel about where the hilt is in the hand in all range of movements. the shape too may reveal more about it's origins.
That's about all I can recall for tonight David, a long day is now at an end for me. Lots more food for thought has been offered up by others, I'll spend a bit of time digesting it all and write again soon.

regards

Gav

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by Henk

Gav,

Did you try a hairdryer?Let the hot air blow on the sticker for a while and it will come off very easily. No damage and no chemicals.

Thanks Henk, no lady in the house, I did soak it with a sponge and with a little elbow greese and some eucalyptus oil and it came off quite easy.

thanks

Gav

[Gavin Nugent]

A wonderful few hours were passed away this morning with the French gentleman I spoke of previously, some may question his authority of such items, antique edge weapons is his love and does reflect in the quality and rarity of some weapons I have never had the privilege of handling before.

His knowledge on this subject matter is incredible when heard first hand.

His credentials stand high, curator in France until 1979, is director and founder and curator of well known and respected art galleries and foundations whose artists are represented at the Queensland State art gallery, is an approved valuer of Cultural Heritage to the Commonwealth Government for Australian Artists, both Aboriginal and contempory, also French sculpture, prints, paintings, decorative arts & furniture from 1600-1950.

A number of these weapons I have seen today have been and are documented in his family history from the 1860's.

Again in length many of my questions were answered in full detail today, the acorns shaped icons I mentioned yesterday are actually a symbol of good luck, they are the "hand of Fatima"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamsa

His historical knowledge was expressed in great detail, kind of wished I had a tape recorder. He also touched on coral found on Kinjals and that it is the red coral that was most prized as it too is a symbol of good luck.

Many points about Niello and it's very early origins were also covered off today from medieval time up until today, his chemistry major was shining through on many other subjects too.

Upon further viewing today, what can be viewed of the script remaining in the central panel to the rear of the scabbard, I have been told that it is most likely a verse from the Koran asking for protection or similar, not a presentation as thought by myself and a couple of others, I am still trying to get it read or rubbed for future posting.

Again this piece was put at approx 1870-1900 and from all explanations, it is of the highest gallery quality...This differs from a link below but at this stage I am happy to go with either until further research has been done.

Throughout this steep learning curve in Kinjals, I am hoping some off the original forumites who made earlier postings will further comment on some comparisons found in the Oriental Arms website that has been offered up to me a few times.
I am not looking to discredit anyone, maybe I have now offered up enough imagery that was not available at the initial postings and initial fears and loathing have been overcome? Maybe it will be continue to be said after all comparisons below that it is still not antique? I am just looking to understand why what's is stated as being right for one is not for another even though it shows all the signs of being correct and of period as seen my many first hand, maybe we can all learn from this???

Originally Posted by ariel

Butterfield or not, I have an uneasy feeling about it.
The niello looks very fresh and remarkably intact: not a scratch, not a missing segment. Repousse has a feel of being stamped.

I understand this as the initial photos certainly showed off the best and most unworn parts of the piece, what are your views Ariel on the images of the worn Niello?

Originally Posted by ariel

The wooden inserts ( handle) are light in colour. The incised lines at the tip of the scabbard are shiny and the edges look sharp. The blade has strange proportions and is too clean. The "buttons" on the back of the hilt are poorly flattened, very crude. Are there any markings?

As this wood has been noted as a very old fabric, does this denote anything in particular. Do the photos of the tip referred to,(at 100X magnification) make the rounded edges any clearer. Do the lack of refinement on the rivets not make it an authentic piece, it has been my understanding that the rivets would rarely be paid a lot of attention, as they, throughout their life may be replaced when and if ever a blade needed to be replaced?

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=966
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2766
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=1062
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2885

I haven't looked any further for bad riveting on silver Kindjals..these should do

I understand, of course, that photographs are not an ideal way to evaluate antique items, but..... It looks to me as if it hails from the same " workshop" as the first one.
Sorry, I am not enjoying bringing bad news....[/QUOTE]

Maybe I need a photography course in bringing real essence out of objects??

Here is a link to it's almost twin brother...again from Oriental arms...

Actually this link may convince others of it's authenticity???

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2181

And for argument sake within the forum I'll even run with 1920 ...

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I'm with Alex and Ariel on this one. Have bad feeling about it. The blade most especially looks to much like the new ones. The quality of the niello and silver work is suspect. Some more pics of the blade may answer the age question.

Hope I am wrong for freebooter's sake.

Hi Charles, it may be a while before I post blade images, I will be working slowly at polishing out the linishing marks, know that the description given in Oriental arms is exactly the same right down to the size.

regards

Gav

Originally Posted by ALEX

As always - very good observations Ariel. I completely agree.
Gav, I have a comment about the term "craftsmanship". It'd be deceiving to think of it in isolated manner, i.e. without detailed comparison of quality, technique, design, etc. To produce anything requires work, skills and effort. But as Ward said - one has to be critical of any item. Just because it looks like someone "worked" on it, does not mean much. Even if it looks good and wonderful... unless you know exactly what to look for... is irrelevant in terms of collectors value!!! One will be able to see the difference only by studying, handling and comparing as many pieces as possible.

Hi Alex, with further images, notes, declarations and links provided, is there anything else or other points of interest you can point out?

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

I'm with Ariel.

Looks more recent to me and the incised lines are pretty sloppy not something you would see on an older piece. Everything looks too fresh and new to me. Artzi has a number of older examples in his sold section here is one for comparison.

http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2601

Lew

Hi again Lew, the lines, to my eyes are clearly made by or at least in the same guild/family as the last link on Oriental Arms. What is your views and points of interest with my comparrison?

The dreaded Kindjal postings continues, still striving for facts...

regards

Gav

[Gavin Nugent]

The silence is deafening guys, I was hoping for a little more objective speculation



Gav

[Lew]

Gav

I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest.

Gav this will be my last response on this thread. The sloppy lines I referring to are in these two areas below. Unevenly scribed on the acorn shaped tip that extend past the area that is bordered by that scribed oval which are themselves very poorly applied. Also within the panel above the tip the checkered work is unevenly done with some of the lines being crooked. This is not the work of a master engraver. The theory that an apprentice did this work does not make sense do to the fact that the master would not have let this leave his shop looking like this because it would a some what of a negative effect on his reputation. Hey if you like the kindjal and think it's old and original than that's fine but I am entitled to my opinion as are the other forumites and I think we have made up our minds on it already. I am basing this on my experience and observations over the last 25 years that I have collecting edged weapons.



Regards

Lew

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest.

Gav this will be my last response on this thread. The sloppy lines I referring to are in these two areas below. Unevenly scribed on the acorn shaped tip that extend past the area that is bordered by that scribed oval which are themselves very poorly applied. Also within the panel above the tip the checkered work is unevenly done with some of the lines being crooked. This is not the work of a master engraver. The theory that an apprentice did this work does not make sense do to the fact that the master would not have let this leave his shop looking like this because it would a some what of a negative effect on his reputation. Hey if you like the kindjal and think it's old and original than that's fine but I am entitled to my opinion as are the other forumites and I think we have made up our minds on it already. I am basing this on my experience and observations over the last 25 years that I have collecting edged weapons.



Regards

Lew

Interesting Lew,

Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process.

From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused
All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column???
I can only offer up what I see first hand and describe it best I can with images 100 times larger than the item really is. I too offer up links from the same people that are presented to me and....well like you say, opinions????

Gav

[Lew]

[QUOTE=freebooter]Interesting Lew,

Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process.

From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused
All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column???


Gav

Your logic is flawed to say the least you asked the specialists on this forum to give you there thoughts on your kindjal and they did.
Regards

Lew

[fernando]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest.

IMHO, wouldn't that have been the wisest attitude ?


.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

Your logic is flawed to say the least you asked the specialists on this forum to give you there thoughts on your kindjal and they did.
Regards

Lew

Hi Lew, flawed logic........ with regards to silver fitted kindjals...

Without circling all visual references supplied in this forum over the years, I do wish to know from yourself and these specialists and any others who have knowledge in this forum on these weapons. Take these following comments on board with out taking any visual references of my Kindjal into perspective, just leave it out of any thought process.
Why does lets say, unfinished rivets, sloppy lines for starters make one kindjal a true piece and another not?? Does this flaw in accuracy point to the differences between a collector and a researcher. I don't claim to be a professional researcher but I think these valid visual references do point to something that needs to be researched for the betterment of all concerned in learning the truth behind these weapons, after all this is a resource/research site is it not, not just a show and tell???

regards

Gav

[Lew]

Gav

It's a real kindjal but collectively we do not feel that it's from the 19th century. Just like in my jambiya thread the newer piece is a real jamibiya that an adult male Yemenite would wear it's just not from the 19th century as I have shown in my photos what to look out for when one is looking for an older piece the quality of the older pieces speak for themselves Maybe one day you can join us at our annual show at Timonium and you can bring your kindjal so you can compare it in person with some others that our advanced collectors have and then we will see. Until then this thread should be put on hold.


Regards

Lew

[chevalier]

this is a little off topic but what exactly are the "spiky protrusions" on the hilt for? i have a kindjal from daghestan that unfortunatly turned out to be a dull wallhanger and those spiky things make the knife harder to handle.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

It's a real kindjal but collectively we do not feel that it's from the 19th century. Just like in my jambiya thread the newer piece is a real jamibiya that an adult male Yemenite would wear it's just not from the 19th century as I have shown in my photos what to look out for when one is looking for an older piece the quality of the older pieces speak for themselves Maybe one day you can join us at our annual show at Timonium and you can bring your kindjal so you can compare it in person with some others that our advanced collectors have and then we will see. Until then this thread should be put on hold.


Regards

Lew

Roger, well spoken Lew. I would love a shopping spree in America. If I plan a trip into the US with it I better get police permits in order so I can return with it in my possesion as the federal import laws here restrict double edged weapons under 40cms in length. It will be on my list of things to acheive in the next few years. I look forward to meeting you all then.

Gav

[katana]

I have followed this thread with interest and as my knowledge of Kindjals is very limited, I will not comment on the age authenticity of Gav's piece. However, I do feel there has been a number of comments regarding the accessment of the Kindjal that are relavent to a number of threads.

In a learning environment it is far better that negative and positive comments ...are backed up with evidence. This 'enriches' the debate and adds to our 'collective' knowledge. It would be extremely useful in all threads that short comments such as .....this is likely mid 20th century ....is expanded into the reasons why.
I have great respect for a number of Formites and 'bow' to their undoubted knowledge, but we/they are only human and mistakes can happen, especially when you have only a description and pictures to 'go on'.
Also, as collectors we have to accept that we can be 'fooled' in believing we have something that is totally authentic, to discover that others disagree. Unfortunately, this sometimes can be 'taken personally', afterall not only the piece has become questionable but also the collector's belief and knowledge.

As a footnote, AFAIK auction house's descriptions of items are not necessarilly totally correct, the 'small print' always carries a disclaimer protecting them from repocussions. Unless an Auction house will totally guarantee an object's description, to the extent of offering a refund (if found to be incorrect) and some sort of compensation to cover your expenses etc I would take their accessment with a 'pinch of salt'.

Very famous Auction house's have sold items, that their experts have deemed 'totally authentic', but later have been discovered to be fake It happens. Therefore, I personally would not accept the Auction House's description as evidence of its authenticity or age.

All the best

David

[Gavin Nugent]

Thanks for popping by David.

True words spoken David, everything in this world has a cost and it is buyer beware, there are however dealers who may not know the whole truth behind an item they have for sale but do stand by their reputation and receive returned goods and offer refunds. I too wouldn't hold any thing said about an item from an auction house as gospel, hence the tenaciousness to draw more information from those who expressed some knowledge in the area. I always trust my own judgement when handling an item and to a degree specialist auctioneers who are honest with their degree of knowledge in certain areas.

It is a shame that so many threads do appear with nothing more than a single link and no more than a quick paragraph that really doesn't have any impact on the thought process. A while later these links are no longer available to view and the whole essence and learning process is lost forever, if in fact there is any learning process at all at times.
A shame that people who claim to be so knowledgable and advanced collectors can really offer up so little substantial information and shy away when the going gets tough and answers are questioned and more detail requested, very ponderous. I personally want my boundries pushed, I don't want to sit insulated and stale, I crave facts.

There are points I have bought up in this thread that I feel would be benificial to all interested in these weapons but those "in the know" don't seem to think so???

Blade profile and shape for one, I did ask about the blades with a recurved double edged tip compared the images shown here, What about the untra violet light to read faint or rubbed inscriptions, the use of coral and the hand of Fatima symbolism on these weapons, I will when given the time add this to Jim's thread on symbolism as I don't think it has been covered off. Also there is the mention of red coral for good luck, the use of material to cover the wooden sheath and hilt inserts, the varying styles of hilt profiles found on these peices, even verses of the Koran that may be found on these pieces.

Obviously these points of interest are of no concern to a few here but these points above and others throughout the postings are many points worth discussing and writing about here, after all that is what this site is about.

regards

Gav

PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all.

[Mark]

Though not always necessary in an informal forum such as this, it is always important to be able to lay out facts/evidence in support of any claim. Sometimes the one-line conclusory answer suffices, other times a more detailed basis is needed or requested. The absense of one, or insistance upon one, should not (IMO) reflect negatively on either the opiner.

There have been a number of factual observations made about this piece which have been indicated as showing it to be either recent or antique, but what I think is lacking a bit is the significance of these observations in the context. There are inprecise, you might say sloppy, aspects to the engraving. What does this mean for a kindjal? As someone pointed out, sloppy does not universally equate either with "recent" or "fake." But does it for kindjal? The niello has certain wear patterns - what does this tell us, other than that it is worn? What do the particulars of the blade geometry tell us? Should a 19th C kindjal have well-made, or unfinished rivits? Is there some sine qua non for an 18th C, or 18th C, or 20th C kindjal?

For example, in my own experience, a poorly made blade, even in fancy fittings, says nothing about the age or genuineness of a dha, as it is not uncommon for a genuinely "old" dha to have a rather poorly made blade. The same goes for the craftsmanship of the fittings. They can be a clue, but you have to look beyond to the whole package & context to see whether a poorly made blade of this particular style, with this particular type of fitting, from this region is consistent with the purported age, or not.

[Lew]

PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all.[/QUOTE]


Gav

I do not understand why you are asking this question Why would you ever bring this up in the discussion it has nothing to do with your kindjal unless you get off by trying to purposely ruffle someones feathers?

Lew

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all.

Gav

I do not understand why you are asking this question Why would you ever bring this up in the discussion it has nothing to do with your kindjal unless you get off by trying to purposely ruffle someones feathers?

Lew[/QUOTE]

I would have explained here Lew but you rude PM, it covered off enough about "we" and your use of the word. It was an inocent question that could have been answered simply specifically or other ways.

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest.

Gav this will be my last response on this thread.
Regards

Lew

Originally Posted by freebooter

There are points I have bought up in this thread that I feel would be benificial to all interested in these weapons but those "in the know" don't seem to think so???

Blade profile and shape for one, I did ask about the blades with a recurved double edged tip compared the images shown here, What about the untra violet light to read faint or rubbed inscriptions, the use of coral and the hand of Fatima symbolism on these weapons, I will when given the time add this to Jim's thread on symbolism as I don't think it has been covered off. Also there is the mention of red coral for good luck, the use of material to cover the wooden sheath and hilt inserts, the varying styles of hilt profiles found on these peices, even verses of the Koran that may be found on these pieces.

Obviously these points of interest are of no concern to a few here but these points above and others throughout the postings are many points worth discussing and writing about here, after all that is what this site is about.

regards

Gav

These questions above I feel are the real issue, lets explore them and others, I know I will post informative content as it comes to hand and I hope others will also take an interest in explaining these things.

regards

Gav

Moderators, for the betterment of all, some are taking things far too personally, maybe some comments should be struck from the postings, maybe the post should be closed and the pursuit for knowledge be shut down

[Lew]

Gav

What part of "We" do you not understand? We being the other formites who posted their comments and did not think your kindjal was circa 1860. Btw I do not claim ownership of any group on this forum as you insinuated below

PS. Lew, on a number of occasions recently you have used the word "we" as in the tense of taking ownership of a group, are you are representing a group of people who I do not know of, I am just a little lost with "we", that's all.


Your question is presumptive to begin with and is antagonist at the least. Maybe you need to be more careful when you post your questions as to not to step on other formites toes.
Lew

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

What part of "We" do you not understand?

Lew

Against my better judgement Lew, I will share what I know of the English language as your intentions of not entering into this posting anymore has fallen by the wayside a number of threads ago.
When the word "we" is used the way you describe Lew, it does in fact take ownership of others, it should in fact read "I". It is much like so many who say "how are we today", in this case it should be how are "you" or "how are you all today", when asked that question in such context I couldn't reply for another, especially one who indicates that I should comment on how they are. Would my reply be "WE are well today", I think not, my reply would be "I am well thank you, how are you". I was only confused as to who "we" was, now that you mention who "we" are, I now know you are the spokesman of others who choose not to enter further into an educational fact finding mission about Kindjals with silver fittings.

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Gav

We being the other formites who posted their comments and did not think your kindjal was circa 1860.

Lew

As you indicated in the abrasive, abusive and threatening PM, you did indicate that you exchange mail with others internally which is what the study is all about, as this is a discussion forum wouldn't that knowledge and comments, study and research be better bought to light objectively in the pages of the forums, for the most here it is blah blah blah and nothing to verify comments. I'd believe it is a Chinese Jian if one can indicate why and because and with a good many unrefuted points of reference.
I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery, still nothing further to enhance the learning process is made any clearer why the new evidence should or shouldn't be taken on board, how is anyone going to learn further if it is all hush hush behind the scenes if it is there at all???

I think Mark's comments below do indicate further as to what I offered across and as to what can be learnt here.

Originally Posted by Mark

Though not always necessary in an informal forum such as this, it is always important to be able to lay out facts/evidence in support of any claim. Sometimes the one-line conclusory answer suffices, other times a more detailed basis is needed or requested. The absense of one, or insistance upon one, should not (IMO) reflect negatively on either the opiner.

There have been a number of factual observations made about this piece which have been indicated as showing it to be either recent or antique, but what I think is lacking a bit is the significance of these observations in the context. There are inprecise, you might say sloppy, aspects to the engraving. What does this mean for a kindjal? As someone pointed out, sloppy does not universally equate either with "recent" or "fake." But does it for kindjal? The niello has certain wear patterns - what does this tell us, other than that it is worn? What do the particulars of the blade geometry tell us? Should a 19th C kindjal have well-made, or unfinished rivits? Is there some sine qua non for an 18th C, or 18th C, or 20th C kindjal?

For example, in my own experience, a poorly made blade, even in fancy fittings, says nothing about the age or genuineness of a dha, as it is not uncommon for a genuinely "old" dha to have a rather poorly made blade. The same goes for the craftsmanship of the fittings. They can be a clue, but you have to look beyond to the whole package & context to see whether a poorly made blade of this particular style, with this particular type of fitting, from this region is consistent with the purported age, or not.

regards

Gav

[Lew]

Gav

I do not need a lesson in the english language I am quite sure that everybody but you understood what I had meant by We. You have posted comments such as the silence is deafening comment which to some was a deliberate sarcastic and somewhat snide remark. My PM was not threatening to say the least I was just stating how I felt and it being a Private Message something we(yes I am speaking for the majority) here at the forum do not share or discuss on the public threads and that is why they are called Private.

I think you are missing the whole point, subjectively I would place this piece at 1880-1920 and of a very high standard, All I have heard thus far is that it is rubbish, a fake, poor quality and many other misleading comments from those who claim to be in the know and when I disprove these comments subjectively and with further imagery

Gav

Your imagery proves nothing anyone with a moderate level of skill and the right tools can produce the same work on your kindjal.


Lew

[kronckew]

We are not amused.

(the royal 'we').

we suggest this thread has gone as far as it needs to.
we are nicer people than where this is heading.

[Andrew]

Please take it off-board if you want to continue this, gentlemen.

I might also suggest you explore the "ignore" function of the forum's software.

Thread closed.